25 October 2008 4:26 PM

Who doctored the toffs?

This is Peter Hitchens' Mail on Sunday column

I bring you the Mystery of the Missing Toff. Who is doctoring pictures of the Bullingdon Club?

And why?

By a mysterious process, almost all photographs of this unlovely society for rich, young drunkards have now been suppressed, which suits David Cameron very well, since he is in so many of them, looking so very rich and arrogant. I have seen them.

But last week a new study of the lads appeared, featuring George Osborne and his (now former) friend Nat Rothschild.

To the left of the middle, there’s a mysterious gap where somebody ought to be standing but isn’t. Odder still, there’s a patch of shirt-front and waistcoat there, with no person attached.

Odder yet, Mr Rothschild’s right trouser leg has a white lapel, not usual even under the bizarre dress code of the Bullingdon.

On close examination, the three seated figures at the front appear to have been stuck in place after being moved from somewhere else.

This is an intriguing little mystery. My own theory is that the original doctoring was done many years ago, possibly only very soon after the photo was taken, hence the botched and clumsy nature of the correction which represents the contemporary technology in the hands of someone inexperienced. The cleaned-up version with the floating lapel removed represents the same thing being done in our era and its concomitant, user-friendly software.

There is a mystery pertaining this photos. It is important of an organization to have transparency in their work. These men of credibility have been a victim of somebody whose got nothing to do with his life. I have to say that there has to be an immediate action to take towards it.

Well done Peter for having the courage & knowledge to write the truth, to swim against the tide takes guts,something you are not short of,keep up the good work, while you still can, you are in my prayers, God Bless you
Terry Bennett.

It appears that the lapel shown near the leg of the lower man came from the right lapel (as you're looking at the picture) of the man in the center of the 3 front men. Not sure what it means, but they line up.

I think Gillian Picker is confusing this picture with another study of the Bullingdon club, which contained David Cameron. Not only was I not 'out of the country' when it was published, but I used that picture, and another, in my Channel Four programme about Mr Cameron. I also broke the story of how that picture was mysteriously withdrawn from circulation, and cannot be used any more, which was followed up by Newsnight (which commissioned an artist to paint a copy of the picture).

In response to 'Elizabeth', please be assured that I explored these avenues before publishing the article. The other version of the picture seems to have been cleaned up, though I have no idea by whom, to hide the signs of doctoring. That's why i didn't notice them when the picture originally circulated. The picture now circulating doesn't hide them. The fact is that the picture has been doctored in such a way as to suggest that a figure or figures have been removed from it, the current version makes this plain, and nobody yet knows exactly why or by whom this was done. Different versions of a doctored picture don't offer much of a clue to unravelling this mystery, or if they do, I can't see how.

It is also surprisingly hard, in these days of electronic storage, to trace the ultimate origin of any photograph.

Dear Peter, I don't know what the truth is but I question the "Daily Mail" article dated 27th October 2008 and initially titled "Riddle of the two missing hellraisers: Was George Osborne Bullingdon Club picture doctored - and why?" (now titled "Mystery of the missing hellraisers: George Osborne and the spirits at the drinking party"). If you care to use the search feature on the DM's website using the words "Bullingdon Club" you'll reach an article titled "Oxford 1992: Portrait of a 'classless' Tory" dated 7th April 2007. This article uses a version of the picture which has no "extraneous lapels" and is of a much better quality than the picture dated 27th October 2008. Perhaps the answer lies in the photographic archive of the "Daily Mail"?

In answer to Vikki Boynton, no, of course I have not seen the undoctored version of this picture. Had I done so I could answer my own question. I have seen other pictures including David Cameron which are now suppressed or have never been published and now cannot be, thanks to the owners' curious decision to turn away vast amounts of business and cease to allow their publication. Some versions of the picture in question were again altered to black out the weird bits of wandering clothing. It was only when this version surfaced that I noticed the problem. But my interest was originally aroused by what seemed to me to be a space where a missing figure should be standing. I noticed the other things only after that.

Mrs Cole claims not to see the point of the article. I can't really help her. If she thinks that it's not interesting that such a picture, containing so many interesting and influential people in their formative but pre-fame years, has plainly been altered then that's just how she is. I think it's completely fascinating. Several other newspapers followed my story, which newspapers only do when they feel they've missed something, so I think my judgement in this matter is sound. As for Mr "Demetriou" and his know-all little lecture on the principles of journalism, I published the item precisely because I hoped it would help me find the answer. Does he think the Bullingdon Boys will tell me if I ask them?

If you look( as I have done) at an enlarged version of the picture on a computer screen, it is clear ( as it isn't in a normal size version) that the three at the front have been moved from elsewhere. They have 'haloes', which give this away. But even in the small size picture it's clear that the one on the left is a bit oddly shaped, unless he is wearing a Dracula-style cloak.

Its the weirdest thing I've ever seen. I'd say the bottom row of 'three men were originally up against the third right guy's leg. But there's nothing I can suggest for the ghost being hugged in the left corner. Whose jacket lining is that?

They should hold their heads high and not seek to deny that they were in it.

They should be proud of elevating drunkenness and thuggery to an art form? Are thuggery and drunkenness rendered acceptable, if not desirable, just because you can reach into your wallet and write a cheque to compensate others for any damage you may have caused?

The photo is really most odd. One wonders why, if it has been doctored, it was done so badly in an age where it is so easy to do a good job. Has it been left like that deliberately so that we will all notice? If so, by whom and for what purpose.

I don't think the three men at the bottom look all that odd. It could be that the 'lighting' mentioned by Luca McCarty is because they caught the flash, being closer and lower to the camera?

If it has been doctored on behalf of those in the photo, it is shameful. They should hold their heads high and not seek to deny that they were in it. Far worse to have changed it. So who are the missing people? Did you not say that you have seen the original Peter?

I've seen some more comments around the blogosphere and some have pointed out that the three faces of the men at the front-bottom are very odd. The lighting is wrong, especially on the face of the right man. He has almost certainly had that face pasted on and the other two are possible frauds.

Tory party goons have done this to protect Call Me Dave, if you ask me. But it's no good pretending that Cameron and Osborne are like the rest of us, they were born into appalling luxury and their patrician disdain for the plebs cannot be hidden.

This sort of thing is great if it undermines Cameron's attempts to wangle himself into office - as is Osborne's fraternizing with a Russian plutocrat. Long may it continue.

Mrs Cole, the April 2007 picture which the Daily Mail printed and can be found elsewhere on this site is also probably doctored. It's the latest picture that reveals that it might. There are two possibilities:

1. The latest picture shows obvious signs of doctoring but is otherwise identical to the first one. So whoever did this might have access to the real original and didn't think to simply use the April 07 one which is much better done if it is photo-shopped.

2. The latest picture was doctored to make it seem as if both were changed. The April 07 picture could in fact really be an original and the new picture has common photo-shop artifacts added intentionally to cast doubt on both pictures.

Finding out where they came from is the only way to know, unless someone finds a version of these pictures containing more Bullington members.

The 'party' was very interesting. Murdoch, Mandelson, Rothschild, Osborne and co, What would be more interesting to know exactly who else featured on the guest list of this exclusive gathering. I suspect that's where the real story lies.

Obviously the "erased" people have disgraced themselves in some way, perhaps by going on to become productive and useful members of society. Only the very rich and very useless are worthy of membership of the Bullingdon Club.

There are at least 5 missing from the pic, who should be kneeling on the last step and also, 2 who are missing from the middle who should be standing. One of the missing is David Cameron! Standing to the left of centre as you look at the pic.

Seriously Peter, perhaps, it is possible Mr Derepaska has property interests in Cambridge which have fallen victim to the debaucheries of Bullingdons. This if were true, would establish an overwhelming need for the father of each offending Bullindon to grasp hold of the nearest Bullingdon Parliamentarian in order to press-gang a courier to promptly and fully recompense Mr Derapaska.

I have even thought of the novel ‘My Family and other Animals’ by Gerald Durrell also set in Corfu. But then I heard a growl, it was the Beast of Bolsover, itself a quasi version of one of Durell’s animals, but one which figuratively stalks education establishments for signs of well educated, especially well spoken, specimens who cannot then deny they are Tories unless of course they are card carrying members of the Labour Party.

So I have settled for Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar and of my name-sakes (Mark Anthony’s) famous remarks which I have corrupted to read as follows:

“Friends, Romans, Bullingdons. I come not to borrow from Derapaska but to pay him.”

Moreover, the contemporary good conduct of David Cameron, George Osborne and Boris Johnson, does make it entirely feasible of the Bullingdon Club, to insist of its three most celebrated members, they each draw straws to select which of them (as punishment) should act as courier, sent to handover payment to Mr Derepaska - not to collect from him of course.

Alas my prayers are with the proverbial Orkney pony whose name is synonymous with that of a Blairite Donkey soon to be a Peer of the Realm.

No need to offer prayers for George Osborne - he doesn't need them - he hasn't done anything wrong and an inquiry is not needed to prove such.

A few seconds search on Google will bring up the original picture, published by the Mail no less!. The 3 seated figures that 'appear to have been stuck in place' are there, no mysterious gaps or free-floating lapels.
Sorry, don't quite see the point of the item, maybe you can enlighten us.

Consider what would happen if a group of boys on a council estate, the same age as Oxford undergraduates, formed themselves into an organisation - complete with a name, a uniform, officers and a membership list - specifically for the purpose of becoming drunk and disorderly before committing criminal damage and even assault. They would rightly be sent to prison

Posted by: David Lindsay | 26 October 2008 at 12:22 AM

Not sure about that David - sounds like they could make a tidy living out of organised Crime if they handled it properly and could end up mixing with the near-cream of society and going 'legit.'

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear on this weblog until the moderator has approved them. They must not exceed 500 words. Web links cannot be accepted, and may mean your whole comment is not published.